2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems 2008
DOI: 10.1109/iros.2008.4651099
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving Monte Carlo Localization in sparse environments using structural environment information

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, we must point out that in sparse environments the thinning algorithm will not cover all free regions seen by the sensors. Thus, in this cases we recommend the additional use of partial thinning relaxations [16], to ensure that the robot will stay close to walls, delaying the entrance on featureless regions. Fig.…”
Section: Time Driven Bvp Integrated Explorationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we must point out that in sparse environments the thinning algorithm will not cover all free regions seen by the sensors. Thus, in this cases we recommend the additional use of partial thinning relaxations [16], to ensure that the robot will stay close to walls, delaying the entrance on featureless regions. Fig.…”
Section: Time Driven Bvp Integrated Explorationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We observe that when L = 0, the robot navigates several steps inside region L 1 . This region is sparse and does not help the robot to localize itself properly [3]. While the other regions H 1 −H 4 are disregarded even though these regions have been visited many times (Figure 7(b)).…”
Section: A Experiments In a Sparse Environmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The environment preferences can be used together with localization strategies to improve robot localization in problems of global localization [3]. In our case, we use the preferences to guide the robot in its mapping task favoring certain regions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Grid localization approximates the posterior using a histogram filter over a grid decomposition of the pose space [21], [22], [23], [24], [7]. MCL is based on a particle filter that represents the posterior belief by a set of weighted samples (also called particles) distributed according to this posterior [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [7], [32], [33], [34]. The crucial disadvantage of these two approaches is that they bear heavy online computational burden.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%